Which came closer to its stated multiple, FAS or XLFX?

Over the window to Sep 30, 2026, FAS finished 3.4 points from what its multiple implies and XLFX finished 2.9 points from its own, so XLFX came closer. Neither figure predicts the next window: it depends on how much the underlying moves about.

Are FAS and XLFX levered on the same thing?

Yes. Both are levered on financials, FAS at +3 times and XLFX at +2 times the daily move.

Which one decays faster, FAS or XLFX?

Decay follows how much the underlying moves about. Over this window FAS’s moved at 13% annualized and XLFX’s at 13%, so FAS has the rougher ride and, at the same multiple, loses more to compounding.

Can I hold FAS or XLFX for a year?

Both reset every day, so the multiple in the name applies to a single day and the daily results compound. Over a year the total is not the multiple times the year’s move, and in a market that falls and comes back it is reliably less. ETFIQ makes no recommendation either way.

Which is cheaper, FAS or XLFX?

FAS charges 0.88% a year and XLFX charges 0.45%, so XLFX is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.

Share on X Download as PDF Open live

FAS vs XLFX: which held to its multiple?

Over three months against its own daily promise, FAS finished 2.4 points short and XLFX 2.5 points short. Direxion Daily Financial Bull 3X ETF and Corgi U.S. Financials 2x Daily ETF.

−9.9%

FAS returned, 3 months

−7.2%

XLFX returned, 3 months

−3.4 pts

FAS from its stated multiple

−2.9 pts

XLFX from its stated multiple

FAS · 3 months to Sep 30, 20263.4 pts short of its stated multiple

FAS returned −9.9% while 3 times XLF's move would have been −6.5%

XLFX · 3 months to Sep 30, 20262.9 pts short of its stated multiple

XLFX returned −7.2% while 2 times XLF's move would have been −4.4%

ETFIQ Decay Resistance Score · FAS scores higherDid it keep up with its own daily multiple, compounded day by day?

FAS 58.9

XLFX 53.3

0.1, the lowest in this set99.9, the highest

A percentile among the 470 leveraged ETFs, long, over three months. It is a position in a set, not a rating, and neither end of it is a recommendation. All leveraged ETFs ranked by it → How it is computed →

Performance, window by window

	Total return		Multiple would give		Difference
Window	FAS	XLFX	FAS	XLFX	FAS	XLFX
1 month	−21.0%	−14.5%	−21.4%	−14.3%	+0.4 pts	−0.2 pts
3 months	−9.9%	−7.2%	−6.5%	−4.4%	−3.4 pts	−2.9 pts
6 months	+19.7%	not published	+26.3%	not published	−6.6 pts	not published
1 year	−13.6%	not published	+2.0%	not published	−15.6 pts	not published
3 years	+167.6%	not published	+205.8%	not published	−38.2 pts	not published
Since launch FAS Jan 2010 · XLFX Jun 2026	+1454.0%	+7.3%	not meaningful	+11.4%	not meaningful	−4.1 pts

FAS and XLFX over each window. Every figure is an ETFIQ calculation with distributions reinvested. Source: ETFIQ. Open the live comparison on ETFIQ →

On the same fields

FAS

Direxion Daily Financial Bull 3X ETF · Aims to return three times the daily move of financials (XLF)

XLFX

Corgi U.S. Financials 2x Daily ETF · Aims to return twice the daily move of financials (XLF)

Issuer Direxion Corgi

Sets out to return +3x +2x

Underlying asset XLF XLF

Segment sector sector

Fund returned, 3 months or since launch −9.9% −7.2%

Underlying returned, over that window −2.2% −2.2%

What the stated multiple implies, over that window −6.5% −4.4%

Difference from stated, over that window −3.4 pts −2.9 pts

Fund returned, 1 year or since launch −13.6% +7.3%

Difference from stated, over that window −15.6 pts −4.1 pts

Underlying volatility 13% 13%

Difference over the days both have traded no shared window −2.9 pts

Expense ratio 0.88% 0.45%

Launched Jan 4, 2010 Jun 3, 2026

Net assets $1.9bn $522,730

FAS and XLFX on the same fields, as of Sep 30, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.

FAS in plain words

Three months to Sep 30, 2026: FAS returned −9.9% where its own daily promise gave −7.6%, 2.4 points short. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and 3 times XLF's −2.2% implies −6.5%, which makes FAS look 3.4 points short. 1.0 of that is daily compounding, which happens to any 3 times fund over the same path, and the rest is the fund. FAS aims to return +3 times XLF's move each day, then resets. Over one day it does that. Over longer, the daily results compound, so the total is not +3 times the period's move: in a market that falls and comes back it is reliably less, and in a steady run it can be more. XLF moved at 13% annualized over that window. That is what decides how far the two figures separate: the same fund on a calm underlying and a violent one is a different product.

XLFX in plain words

Three months to Sep 30, 2026: XLFX returned −7.2% where its own daily promise gave −4.7%, 2.5 points short. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and 2 times XLF's −2.2% implies −4.4%, which makes XLFX look 2.9 points short. 0.3 of that is daily compounding, which happens to any 2 times fund over the same path, and the rest is the fund. XLFX aims to return +2 times XLF's move each day, then resets. Over longer, the daily results compound, so the total is not +2 times the period's move: in a market that falls and comes back it is reliably less, and in a steady run it can be more.

Questions people ask

Which came closer to its stated multiple, FAS or XLFX?: Over the window to Sep 30, 2026, FAS finished 3.4 points from what its multiple implies and XLFX finished 2.9 points from its own, so XLFX came closer. Neither figure predicts the next window: it depends on how much the underlying moves about.
Are FAS and XLFX levered on the same thing?: Yes. Both are levered on financials, FAS at +3 times and XLFX at +2 times the daily move.
Which one decays faster, FAS or XLFX?: Decay follows how much the underlying moves about. Over this window FAS’s moved at 13% annualized and XLFX’s at 13%, so FAS has the rougher ride and, at the same multiple, loses more to compounding.
Can I hold FAS or XLFX for a year?: Both reset every day, so the multiple in the name applies to a single day and the daily results compound. Over a year the total is not the multiple times the year’s move, and in a market that falls and comes back it is reliably less. ETFIQ makes no recommendation either way.
Which is cheaper, FAS or XLFX?: FAS charges 0.88% a year and XLFX charges 0.45%, so XLFX is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.

Other comparisons

FAS vs FAZ FAS vs SEF FAS vs SKF FAS vs UYG XLFX vs FAZ XLFX vs SEF XLFX vs SKF XLFX vs UYG

XLF →FAS on its own →XLFX on its own →How every figure is computed →Standards and sources →

Where these figures came from

FAS filings on SEC EDGAR ↗FAS prospectus with the expense ratio (SEC) ↗Direxion website ↗XLFX filings on SEC EDGAR ↗XLFX prospectus with the expense ratio (SEC) ↗Corgi website ↗

ETFIQ links to the documents behind every figure. It is not affiliated with any issuer, and a link is not an endorsement. A comparison is not a recommendation.

Cite this page

ETFIQ, FAS against XLFX, data as of Sep 30, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/leverage/fas-vs-xlfx

Open data

Free to use with attribution. Every figure is calculated from a named public source; the method is at etfiq.com/methodology.